HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1982/04/27 Item 7COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 4-27-82
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution IDB~~Accepting public improvements -
Otay Valley Road/ Melrose Avenue traffic signal and
granting a 13 day c ntract extension
S EMITTED BY: City Engineer (4/5ths Vote: Yes Noxx )
L kaunas Electric completed the traffic signal at Otay Valley
R ad/Melrose Avenue on April 9, 1982. The contract time for the
c ntract awarded by Council Resolution No. 10687, adopted
N vember 10, 1982, expired as of March 23, 1982. The contractor
h s requested a 13 day extension of the contract time due to rain
d lays. It is my
R COMMENDATION: That the City Council approve the contract time
e tension and accept the traffic signal at Otay Valley
R ad/Melrose Avenue.
/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
T e work consisted of installing a two phase traffic signal at
0 ay Valey Road/Melrose Avenue. The original contract expiration
d to was March 23, 1982. The signal was completed and a final
i spection made on April 9, 1982.
T e contractor has requested a 13 day extension to cover the
p riod from March 23 through April 9. This request for an
e tension was not presented to Council earlier because up until
t e last week of the contract, staff anticipated that the project
w uld be completed on time. During the final week of the
c ntract, there were days last due to rain, two days for the City
t restripe the intersection (the initial striping was ruined by
r in), and two days due to controller malfunction, which was not
c used by the action of the contractor. The 13 day extension is
j stiffed because the contract work was delayed by a total of 17
d ys; 13 rain days throughout the contract, and 4 days due to
c ntroller malfunction and restriping.
B the time staff determined that the project would not be
c mpleted by the contract completion date, there wasnot enough
t'm e to bring the matter of extending the contract to the Council
b fore the contract expired.
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 4/27/82
S nce the problem with the controller was corrected during the
w ek of April 5th (within two weeks of the contract completion
d te), staff decided to present the request for extension to the
C ty Council at the time the traffic signal was accepted.
T~e work was completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer
a d it is now appropriate that the City accept this project.
F~NANCIAL STATEMENT: The total cost to the City for this project
f llows
Total funds requested $63,000
Staff costs 5,731
Funds available for construction $57.269
Construction contract $42,600
Change Order No. 1 105
Total construction cost $42,705
Funds available for construction $57,269
Total construction cost 42,705
Balance $14,564
F SCAL IMPACT: The annual cost for operating this traffic signal
w'l1 be approximately $2,880.
:av/BR006
i
i
~.. _,, ~ L ~, ~ 4, Ccuncii of
~~
r, at i1 i~ ~I_.---.--~
-/D~'~~